International Nursing Association for Clinical Simulation & Learning

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
571147249
IRS 990 coverage
2012–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2025, Form 990-EZ 2011, Form 990-T 2025
Location
Chicago, IL, USA
Phone
3123216813
Rating
74
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Professional Societies, Associations

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$2,167,623
Expenses
$2,045,563
Assets
$1,811,947
Liabilities
$438,046

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

11 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • PENNI WATTS (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHLEY FRANKLIN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • CARMAN TURKELSON (PRESIDENT-ELECT)
  • JANAE LINDSLEY (EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR (SMITHBUCKLIN))

People named in this filing

  • PENNI WATTS (PRESIDENT)
  • ASHLEY FRANKLIN (IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT)
  • CARMAN TURKELSON (PRESIDENT-ELECT)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

Inacsl strives to be global leader in the art and science of healthcare simulation through excellence in nursing education, practice, and research, with the vision that simulation and innovation transform lives.

What it reported doing in 2025

Annual conference - inacsl hosts an annual conference which serves as a leading forum for simulationists, researchers, and solution providers creating the ideal environment to gain and disseminate current, state-of-the-art knowledge in the areas of skills, simulation operations, and applications in an evidenced-based venue. During the event healthcare professionals have the opportunity to network with colleagues and exhibitors, discuss best practices as it relates to competencies, safety, and quality performance indicators, and advance the science of simulation.

Operating model

Revenue model
Other-operating. 98% of the money available for current operations came from other operating revenue.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and most voting board members are independent. A relatively small share of available resources goes toward mission work and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 53
  • Transparency & Controls: 90
  • Accountability: 94
  • Sustainability: 44
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 59.3%; rating input score 59
  • Program expense ratio: 61.2%; rating input score 61
  • Fundraising efficiency: Limited

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: Limited
  • Foreign activity oversight: Limited
  • Grant itemization coverage: Limited
  • Major donor itemization: Limited
  • Related-party transparency: Limited

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 6 of 7 controls in place; rating input score 86
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Fail
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Other executive compensation review process: NotApplicable
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 5.6%; rating input score 45; 45th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.89; rating input score 30; 30th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.24; rating input score 31; 31st percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 0%; rating input score 90; 90th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 8.2% per year; rating input score 100; 53rd percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 10.4% per year; rating input score 100; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 9.7% per year; rating input score 100; 56th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 59.3% of revenue deployed · 61.2% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 10 of 10 board members independent · 6 of 7 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $1.3M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 11 people listed
  • Highest-paid contractors: 1 contractor listed · $1.1M reported
  • Consistency: 26 of 26 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 3 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 11 filing years from 2012 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Mission deployment rate scored 59/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 45/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Whistleblower policy not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 30/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 31/100.